The Arizona sentinel., 1887-02-19
GREAT GENERALS.
General Sherman's Estimate of Napoleon
 Won NoItke and Grant.

General Sherman's Estimate of Napoleon,
 Won MoItke and Grant.
 never knew a man who could tell what he knew better than General w. T. Sherman can. When I was in Wash ington I never failed to be present at public hearing on military matters If General Sherman was to make state ment or be examined. That which in the mouth of almost any other officer of the army would be bald details, and confusing figures became in his as in- teresting as popular lecture. And in private conversation he is equally en- tertainiIg, especially when the topic is the army or the military heroes of this and other lands.
 find in my notebook an entry made in the spring of 1880, which was re- called by reading the recent speech of Count von Moltke in favor of increas- ing the already enormous army of Germany, and the comments of the American and foreign press upon it. l spent an hour one evening in a small company of which General Sherman was one, and when by general consent he had been allowed to do most of the talking. He began by comparing the military abilities of Napoleon, Von Moltke and Grant and said in sub stance:
 '.Napoleon's prom inent characteris- tic was his intellect. As a soldier his strength lay in his power of converg- ence and concentration. He knew his Generals and his men thoroughly. He knew just what they could accomplish and what he had a right to expect of them. He knew just how long it would take a body of troops to go from one point to- another and he would order them from widely different stations and would plan their arrival at given place so accurately as to make his com- binations irresistible. He was like a lens which brings the rays of light to- gether at one point.
 Napoleon ought to have won the bat tie of Waterloo, and would have done so if it had been fought on an open field and if the allies had not been on the defensive. If it had been an equal contest or one in which the allies had VQade the attack upon Napoleon, he woNd have got upon their flank. cut thelr Shes of communication. and whipped Wellington. Napoleon did not understa-d the English character; he did not know1-ew stolid and sullenly stubborn the Englishsoldiers could be. The Germans and others whom he had fought generally became pame-stricken before him. He did not suppose that any thing could resist the Old Guard when they made charge.
 ''Von Moltke is a man of entirely diff ferent genius. He has anlnfnite know ledge of details. He knows howmany people there are in every part of Europe; how many horses, mules, cattle, pigs and chickens they have; where all the roads are and their conditions at differ ent seasons of the year; all the rivers and the best places to lord them; where all the bridges are, and whether they are all stone, iron or wood. He knows his army as thoroughly as he does the country, and it is to his ability to put this knowledge to use that he owes his success"
 Someone in the company asked Gen. eral Sherman if he thought if Napoleon was alive to-day-1SSO-he could or ganize French army that could whip Prussia. He replied: T think he could, but he would need three or four years to do it in. An effective army of about 35O,O men would be requir- ed, and to command it Napoleon would have to create thirteen frst-class Gen. erals"
 Of General Grant, General Sherman said: His distinguishing characteris- tic is his unbounded faith in his own ultimate success. I never saw any thing like it. If Grant was to have an arm a leg shot off and bullet through his body, and should be lying helpless on the battlefield he would still fully expect to get up, mount his horse, and win the day. And such absolute be- lief in ultimate success insures it.'- Cor. N T. Tribune.